How Do Public and Legal Discourses about Counterterrorism in the UK Restrict Activism?
By Helena Cooper,
Oxford Brookes University.
With the proscription of Palestine Action in the summer of 2025, further legal restrictions and the formation of impactful public discourses, activism has been restricted in the UK. This raises concerns about activists´ freedoms, fuelling frustration and constituting negative impact on activist work. Adapting an activist scholar approach, this research examines public and legal discourses about counterterrorism to find out how they restrict activism in the United Kingdom. In a series of semi-structured, qualitative interviews, six participants from organisations across the UK discussed their contemporary experiences in activism. The aim of the interviews was to gather insights into ways different factors such as public attitudes and labelling narratives, conveyed through legal discourse, influence activism. After building a theoretical framework utilising Labelling Theory, prior research was evaluated and common themes from the interviews were identified in the coding process. Participants spoke about feeling unsupported and restricted by the attitudes of authorities, which became apparent through discussions regarding concerns about counterterrorism measures and human rights infringements. Clearly, legal and political authorities must change their approach to activism in the UK so a fair balance between security and the protection of fundamental democratic elements can be achieved. Ultimately, the aim of this study is to provide a platform for UK activists to highlight the restrictions and injustices they face, which is underpinned with academic research into contributing factors. Since this topic is very relevant and greatly under-researched, my study fills a gap and can be used as a foundation for important future research.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22810826